Creating learning programs in the life sciences space is high-stakes. Whether you’re supporting sales teams preparing for a product launch, onboarding medical affairs professionals, or upskilling market access roles, getting learning right is mission-critical.
Too often, well-intentioned Learning and Development (L&D) programs fall short not because they lack rigor but because they overlook the human realities of learning.
Here are six common pitfalls that organizations commonly make when launching L&D programs and how to design around them.
1. Solving the wrong problem: Designing content without learner insight
Too many programs are built from the top down, based on what the business thinks people need to know. But if the content doesn’t resonate with real concerns, it’s unlikely to stick or even be retained past the LMS completion screen.
Teams often skip the step of asking, “What’s hard for our people right now?” Without this emotional and contextual insight, you risk delivering technically correct training that no one remembers.
Try this instead:
Design from the learner’s lived experience. Start by understanding:
- What challenges do they face daily?
- What do they feel unsure or unprepared to do?
- What would success look like for them?
Use interviews, shadowing, or quick pulse checks. This insight allows you to create content that aligns both with business priorities and human needs. When learners feel seen, they engage.
2. Missing the moment: When timing and relevance don’t align
One of the biggest challenges in L&D is delivering training that feels timely and urgent to the learner. In life sciences, where roles and responsibilities shift rapidly from navigating new regulations to launching a new therapy, the cost of mistimed learning is especially high.
Many programs are delivered when it’s convenient for the business, not when it’s most useful for the learner. A new onboarding module may arrive weeks after someone has already started, or a product training drops months before launch, leaving reps to forget it all by the time they need it.
We know that sometimes, business constraints make the timing of training beyond your control, but even in these cases there are still ways to get the most out of your efforts.
Try this instead:
- Embrace just-in-time and lean learning principles:
- Deliver core learning moments aligned with real-world triggers (e.g., pre-launch, post-coaching debrief, change in guidelines).
- Focus on what’s immediately applicable—and make it short, sharp, and usable.
- If the timing is fixed and less than ideal, focus it all on providing content and motivation to change. Save technical training for other channels when your target audience actually needs it.
- Follow with spaced reinforcement, immediate feedback, and opportunities to practice.
Learning is stickiest when it solves a problem the learner is facing right now.
3. Cramming for the sake of coverage: Mistaking volume for value
We’ve all seen it: a three-hour module stuffed with slides, scenarios, acronyms, and assessments. It’s exhaustive. But is it effective?
In an effort to be comprehensive, we often overload our learners. This “more is more” approach creates fatigue, confusion, and ultimately, disengagement. It’s especially problematic in life sciences where learners are already juggling compliance-heavy content and complex scientific information.
Try this instead:
Use the lean learning loop:
- Teach only what is critical at the moment.
- Let people apply it to real scenarios.
- Offer fast feedback and space for reflection.
- Re-engage with deeper layers over time.
Remember: clarity beats coverage. Start with confidence-building basics, then layer complexity through application.
4. Treating everyone the same: Ignoring personalization and role relevance
In a complex environment like pharma, the idea of a “standard learner” is a myth. What works for a key account manager in oncology may be irrelevant to a field reimbursement specialist in rare disease.
Programs are too often one-size-fits-all. This leads to disengagement for advanced learners and overwhelm for newer ones. Worse, it creates the sense that training is out of touch with the learner’s actual role.
Try this instead:
Design modular, flexible learning experiences:
- Create branching pathways based on function, experience level, or learning need.
- Offer self-assessment tools to guide learners toward what’s most useful for them.
- Consider a “choose-your-own-priority” model, where learners engage more deeply with areas of interest or challenge.
Use adaptive pathways. Group learners by role or challenge and offer choices in how they engage (e.g., role-play, case studies, microlearning). Make space for personalization within a consistent framework.
5. Leaving managers on the sidelines: The missed opportunity for reinforcement
Managers are the most powerful reinforcement mechanism you have. Yet in many programs, they’re an afterthought, expected to support change without being part of the learning journey.
If managers don’t understand the learning experience or worse, don’t value it—they won’t coach it. Learners sense the disconnect, and behavior change stalls.
Try this instead:
Bring managers in as coaches, not just approvers. Equip them with:
- Coaching guides and key messages.
- Pre-briefs so they understand what their teams are learning.
- Tools to debrief, encourage application, and spot wins.
Equip managers with simple tools to reinforce key behaviors. Offer them parallel learning paths so they understand what their teams are learning and can lead by example.
6. Celebrating completion over capability: Failing to measure what matters
Many organizations still define success by the number of completions, not by actual change in performance or confidence.
Tracking attendance tells you who showed up—not whether anything stuck. Without follow-through, it’s impossible to know if the investment paid off.
Try this instead:
Shift from activity metrics to outcome metrics:
- What behaviors should increase or decrease as a result of this program?
- What indicators (sales data, error rates, patient feedback) will show that change?
- How will we collect and reflect on that data over time?
Tie metrics to outcomes that matter. Use a mix of data: pre- and post-program assessments, observational feedback, and business KPIs.
But don’t stop at measurement, share results and iterate based on what you learn.
Final thought: Design with humans in mind
The best L&D programs in the life sciences aren’t the longest or the most innovative . They’re the ones that understand their audience, what motivates them, what frustrates them, and what they truly care about.
When we avoid these pitfalls, we don’t just create better learning. We build stronger, more agile teams ready to thrive in a complex world.
Let’s build learning that’s timely, targeted, and transformative.
